Archives

Post navigation

This week, the Homeland Security Policy Institute at The George Washington University released a new issue brief entitled “Pardon the Pivot, What about Africa?” designed to focus more attention on the myriad of security threats and development challenges across Africa. Joseph Clark, Frank Cilluffo and I collaborated to write an overview of the hybrid threats emerging in different regions of Africa and how these security challenges are nested in overlapping, complex regional challenges. In the coming months, HSPI will be working with Africa regional specialists to do indepth investigations into Africa threat groups and the regions in which they reside.

The paper is available at this link and here’s the introduction to the piece. More to follow in the coming months.

Islamist fighters, separatist violence, and France’s recent intervention in Mali took much of the news media by surprise. More than a few journalists were left, like the satirical Stephen Colbert, drawing vague contextual comparisons between Mali and Afghanistan. Unfortunately the media’s lack of knowledge may mirror a general lack of sustained and focused attention on the part of senior policymakers.

Mali, Algeria, and other troubled areas, have been (and continue to be) tinder boxes for the outbreak of conflict and spread of terrorism. In March 2012, Mali suffered a coup sparked by military frustration with the civilian leadership’s prosecution of the Tuareg rebellion. Despite the installation of interim civilian government in April 2012, the coup unleashed a series of destabilizing events that eventually allowed Islamist forces to charge south seizing territory this past January. These events led to France’s intervention — which the militants responded to by attacking a much softer target in Algeria. The attack against the In Amenas gas plant in Algeria was the deadliest terrorist attack on an oil and gas installation in the industry’s one-hundred and fifty year history.

Recent events in these two countries, and in other African nation-states, illustrate how quickly and easily certain parts of Africa may shift from potential to actual hotspots. Furthermore, the presence of longterm concerns and trends at the continental level illuminate the critical need for continued emphasis on the security environment in Africa.

The Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI) published a short blog post I wrote on revelations from internal al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) documents showing how they integrated into the Tuareg insurgency in Mali. Here’s the introduction to the post and I’ll link to the full discussion here at this link.

Overall, the document echoes many of the recommendations discussed by Bin Laden in the Abbottabad documents and outlined in a previous post “Are today’s al Qaeda offshoots following Bin Laden’s vision?”. Droukdel, like Bin Laden, stresses several important principles to his followers at some point after the June 2012.

Patience – Droukdel realizes that AQIM’s gains in Northern Mali were fragile and that pushing the implementation of Sharia aggressively amongst a resistant population could short circuit their future Islamic state.

Integrate with local movements – Droukdel encourages his followers to, “extend bridges to the various sectors and part of Azawad society – Arab, Tuareg, and Zingiya – to end the situation of political, social, and intellectual separation.” Droukdel’s narrative is strikingly similar to that of Bin Laden’s “winning hearts and minds” guidance.

Learn from mistakes – In Chapter 1 page 3, Droukdel discusses mistakes made by their proxies in implementing Sharia requesting that they avoid the “destruction of shrines” and harsh application of religious punishments. Droukdel, like Bin Laden, does not want to see his troops continuing to make the same mistakes.

In addition to the points of similarity with Bin Laden’s vision, Droukdel provides some rather interesting analysis of AQIM’s situation and future. ….

In late 2011, scholars say, he made a bid to become head of his Tuareg tribe — a position that would have put him at the forefront of northern Mali’s struggle for autonomy. When he was rebuffed, Mr. Ag Ghali struck out on his own and formed Ansar Dine, branding it as a religiously inspired alternative to the more secular Tuaregs.

A common mantra of Western CT pundits remains the argument that the U.S. will never be safe unless the evil ideology of Bin Laden has been removed from the planet forever. This briefs well in DC as it makes Americans believe that terrorism can be eliminated if we simply solve one problem – that of bad ideology. However, this article rightly points out how this “hedgehog – one big thing” type thinking quickly falls apart when placed in local contexts.

Chasing a few hundred foreign fighters inspired by religious zeal from the vast, trackless area would be challenge enough. But the forces shaping the conflict are far more complicated than that, driven by personal ambitions, old rivalries, tribal politics, the relationship between militants and states, and even the fight for control of the lucrative drug trade.

Some gather from my blog posts and Twitter sarcasm that I believe ideology has no importance with regards to terrorism. This is not the case. I believe al Qaeda’s ideology is important at different levels for each group and individual based on their own context. The combination of incentives groups and individuals receive from pursuing al Qaeda’s ideology varies considerably based on physical, economic and social contexts. (See here and here.) I use a labor economics approach when I analyze terrorism because it allows for factors other than ideology to contribute to a recruit’s decision to work as a terrorist. For Westerners, like Omar, joining al Qaeda groups rests largely on their belief in al Qaeda’s ideology and probably a host of psychological factors. However, for African groups and individuals (much of what I blog about here), there are many factors contributing to a wavering allegiance to al Qaeda’s ideology (See Chapter 2). In Africa, survival often trumps ideology resulting in malleable interpretations of al Qaeda’s ideology and Sharia. A recent example is Omar Hammami’s complaints over Shabaab’s passive allowance of Qat under Sharia – largely for the purpose of taxing the drug trade for revenue.

Oh Omar, calling me a “kuffar”. Thank you, you are too kind.

In conclusion, I do believe ideology matters but I don’t believe it should be overstated. The importance of al Qaeda’s ideology in Africa, at least for the West, remains the targets it designates. If AQIM/Ansar Dine/MUJWA, etc. didn’t support an ideology where the West was the primary target, I doubt the West would care much about African conflict in the Sahel. Genocide has occurred in Darfur for years, yet the West never seriously mobilized to intervene. However, nine months of perceived “al Qaeda linked” strength in the Sahel brought on a French intervention and Western support. If militant groups like Ansar Dine didn’t support an ideology directly targeting the West, the West would probably ignore them and their issues – such is one of the motivations for pursuing terrorism according to Dr. Bruce Hoffman.

Last point of interest from this latest article on Algeria and Ansar Dine. GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS everywhere please listen: 1) when you adversary’s ideology believes that your government should not exist (i.e. al Qaeda, its affiliates) and 2) they offer to negotiate for peace (i.e. Ansar Dine with Algeria, Pakistani Taliban with Pakistan), what the militant group is really saying is, “We want to negotiate with you, government, so that you will not interfere with us while we consolidate our resources and develop a plan to attack you!”

his men were in Algiers negotiating with the government, promising peace and signing agreements. This continued despite ample evidence that Mr. Ag Ghali had become a committed ally of Al Qaeda in Islamic Maghreb — Algeria’s sworn enemy — receiving arms, weapons, men and other material from the group.

The French intervention into Mali has forced the media to try and dissect the numerous militant groups operating in the Sahel. Newscasters have no idea what to call the groups controlling parts of Mali. Pundits and many news readers prefer to just call them “al Qaeda” as that’s a known brand quickly associated with the 9/11 attacks.

The straight labeling of all violence in the Sahel as al Qaeda gets really tricky, really quickly. Some northern Mali militant groups don’t necessarily believe themselves to be al Qaeda. However, this hasn’t stopped many an ‘expert’ from using Mali as another reason to call for once again “defeating the virulent, ideology of al Qaeda that continues to spread around the world, only then can we stop terrorism.” However, many of the so-called al Qaeda linked groups pontificated on by pundits appear less committed ideologically than one might expect. This past weekend’s New York Times article “French Capture Strategic Airport To Retake North Mali” describes how local Malians were none to impressed by the religious commitment of their visiting jihadis.

Boubacar Diallo, a local political leader, said that only a few rebel fighters came at first. Later, hundreds more joined them, overwhelming the Malian soldiers based here. He said he never saw them pray and scoffed at their assertion that they would teach the Muslim population a purer form of Islam.

“They say they are Muslims, but I don’t know any Muslim who does not pray,” Mr. Diallo said.

The article noted earlier that the backgrounds of the foreign fighters varied considerably amongst the AQIM splinter group – Movement for Unity and Jihad in West Africa (MUJWA). (By the way, Andrew Lebovich has done an excellent breakdown of the groups in Mali at Jihadica see: AQIM, old GIA/GSPC, Blood Signers, MUJWA, Ansar al-Din.)

The rebels spoke many languages, the residents said. Some were light-skinned Arabs and Tuaregs, a nomadic people, while others were dark-skinned people who spoke the local languages of Niger, Nigeria and Mali.

Some analysts have been parsing the statements of these AQIM splinter groups in the Sahel looking for the smoking gun and direct ideological links that clearly reveal each of the militants in Mali as part of a global al Qaeda nexus. However, the labels placed on the fighters/militants rampaging through the Sahel change from daily. One man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist, one man’s terrorist is another man’s mercenary, another man’s mercenary is another man’s patriot, another man’s patriot is ……..I think you get the picture.

Here are some additional reasons why I believe AQIM and its splinter groups will have trouble sustaining their momentum over the long run.

Racism – When I was doing research of al Qaeda’s initial forays into Somalia in the early 1990’s, it was interesting to see how condescending and elitist the Arab members of al Qaeda were to their African members. In the Sahel, my impression is that the African clan/tribal groups, at least to this point, seem content to let Arab foreign fighters and folks from Algeria direct their operations. However, in Somalia, as Omar Hammami can attest, the local clans have persistently been less than receptive to being bossed around by foreign al Qaeda leaders. In Sudan, Bin Laden paid Arab volunteers at a higher rate than he did African members and this wage discrepancy later led to Jamal al-Fadl embezzling from al Qaeda and betraying them as a witness for the Embassy Bombings trial. It’s also important to note that when Zawahiri called in 2007 for international volunteers to support the jihad in Somalia, only a few answered the call and most were ethnic Somalis or Kenyans accompanied by only a trickle of Westerners and Arabs. As Omar Hammami can tell you, answering that call turned out to be a bad decision as he has been expelled mostly for being a foreigner challenging local leaders. (Right Omar?) Today, I’m guessing most jihadi recruits are still more excited to join an Arab dominated jihad in Syria over a campaign in West Africa. So in the long-run, how long will local African tribes adhere to the guidance of their foreign masters while under pressure from the French? I’m guessing not very long.

Excessive violence alienates local populations – As of my writing this post, I’ve started to see reports of retaliatory violence by Malians against those who stayed in Timbuktu and became subservient to AQIM. I’m guessing this aggressive behavior likely comes in part as a reaction to the severe form of Sharia instituted by AQIM in North Mali. As noted above, the ideological commitment of these al Qaeda linked splinters (MUJWA, Ansar al Dine) appears low so the violence dished out on locals equivocates “Sharia” to “lopping off the hands of anyone that challenges the group or does something the group doesn’t like.” Essentially, Sharia for locals in Mali feels a lot like the extortion of organized criminals, not enlightened ideologues.

Reliance on illicit revenues – While Belmohktar’s bold attack in Algeria likely generated needed attention and maybe appealed to a couple fanatical donors, AQIM and its splinters still really heavy on illicit financing to sustain their operations. The Sahel is a difficult place to attract Gulf donor support and an even more difficult place to transfer donor funds. Lacking a strong donor base and more restricted in their ability to conduct illicit financing after the French intervention, I suspect AQIM’s influence and ability to project will contract in the coming months. This does not mean they won’t be able to conduct an operation, but I believe the pace of their efforts will have to scale down.

The past few weeks I’ve been focused on the Horn of Africa, but the real story in terrorism has been occurring in the Sahel. There is way too much to talk about in one blog post. However, I’ll make a few notes here about the current situation in West Africa.

Sahel Experts I Listen To – As I noted in a previous post about AQIM and the Sahel, these are the folks I would recommend listening to on this topic. Also, I’ve embedded a clip from @tweetsintheME with Wolf Blitzer on CNN down below.

Most Frustrating Media Analysis Thus Far – A consistent theme in the media thus far has been that the intervention to oust Qaddafi in Libya is the reason why there’s more terrorism coming from the Sahel. Analysts taking this line imply that the West should not intervene to oust authoritarian dictators because unforeseen events might occur in the future that are bad. I’m also guessing these same ‘experts’ next week will be bashing administrations for not yet intervening in Syria to help topple a dictator and end a humanitarian crisis. These flip-flopping analysts love events like this where they can trace backward to past events as causes for current conflict. However, I don’t remember many analysts saying that the Libya intervention would lead to instability and the rise of terrorism in Mali. Most were focused on the obvious instability that would come amongst Libyan factions after the fall of Qaddafi. In general, I can’t stand analysts that take this course as they can always find a reason not to do something and their ‘Loss Aversion’ leads policymakers to pursue inaction, which also has its second and third order effects as well. Let me think real quick, has there ever been a case where a policy of inaction went awry? Oh yeah, there were those attacks on September 11, 2001. I could go on about this forever, but I won’t. Bottom line: Extremist growth in Mali and the Sahel has been going on steadily back to at least 2008 and results from the confluence of many factors rather than just one factor.

How about France! – One of the things I’ve been most impressed with is France jumping into the fight executing an intervention in Mali on the same day they attempted a hostage rescue in Somalia. The French took casualties in both operations, but they have stopped the march of militants southwest into interior Mali. Nice to see other countries taking action against terrorists to protect their own interests. I’ll be interested to see how long they can hold out.

AQIM is the new epicenter of al Qaeda! (Or is it Yemen, Somalia, Syria?) – Media analysis of the situation and Mali and Algeria is absolutely hilarious. I’ve seen several stories discussing how the Sahara is the new top Al Qaeda threat and shows the resilience of the network and the strength of the terror group. Amazingly the same media outlets don’t appear to research any of their own reporting. As has been discussed here, the story of Al Qaeda growth and strength repeats every few months. Four months ago Libya was the center of attention. Six months before that it was Yemen. And three months before that it was Somalia. Today, one hardly hears a peep about Somalia where Shabaab’s alliance with Al Qaeda has crumbled under the pressures of clan disputes. And in Yemen, reporting has died down to merely a trickle. So I am curious to see how long discussion will stay focused on the Sahara.

Today, the center of attention has moved away from France’s Mali intervention, though, and rests specifically on the hostage crisis at the In Amenas gas facility in Algeria. This is a fascinating turn of events and leads me to several things to explore in the coming days.

The attack was prepared before the French intervention – I have to believe that Belmokhtar’s attack on the gas facility was prepared a significant amount of time before the French intervention. The interesting fact is that he likely prepared the attack and waited for the appropriate time to launch such that he could gain international attention and use it for his own purposes. While this attack is significant, the timing of his next attack will be more important. As noted in some excellent research back in 2011, its the pace of attacks, not the size of any single attack, that are indicative of a terror affiliate’s strength.

Is the In Amenas attack as much about internal AQIM power plays than strategically attacking the West? – The focus for the most part has been on how the attack was spectacular and hit Westerners. However, as was discussed here a few weeks back, maybe this attack by Belhmoktar represents his efforts to reclaim the throne as leader of AQIM. See this post from a few weeks back. Did Belhmoktar launch this attack in coordination with AQIM? I don’t know, but if he didn’t coordinate, this attack could be a power play for him to shore up support locally and fighters and resources globally.

Could Belhmoktar be the inspiring leader for al Qaeda’s next generation? – Last summer, I noted the following in a report “What if there is no al Qaeda?” –

Where are the most talented al-Qaeda veterans going? Today, analysts should seek to identify what path al-Qaeda’s most talented veterans are choosing to pursue. Al-Qaeda’s limited centralized control has likely encouraged some talented terrorists to move on to new groups. Knowing where these veterans go will be essential for anticipating future threats.

Who will lead al Qaeda’s next wave of radicalization? Al Qaeda needs a new inspirational messenger to ramp up its global radicalization and recruitment. Only a select few al Qaeda leaders have actually generated significant audience to radicalize many recruits. Three of al Qaeda’s most effective messengers, Bin Laden, Zarqawi and Awlaki, all blended a unique combination of competence and charisma to radicalize and inspire recruits.

So, is Belhmoktar, AKA Mr. Marlboro, the first new inspiring leader of a new generation of Salafi-Jihadi extremism? He’s a bit weak on the ideological aspects, but he’s a veteran fighter with charisma and attacks under his belt. I guess only time will tell.

For several weeks there has been rumbling of al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) fragmenting in the Sahel. This morning, All Africa reports:

Former Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) emir Mokhtar Belmokhtar (aka “Laaouar”) quit the group to assemble his own band of suicide bombers in northern Mali. …The Algerian terrorist (real name Khaled Abou El Abass) reportedly left AQIM after his demotion as head of the El Moulethemine katibat (“Brigade of the Veiled Ones”)

It appears Belmokhtar wants to create his own terrorist group, which I imagine will compete with AQIM for recruits, turf, weapons and money.

The new terrorist group “is headquartered in the Malian city of Gao, which is under the control of Islamists from the Movement for Tawhid and Jihad in West Africa (MUJAO), an offshoot of AQIM”….Through the creation of the new group, Belmokhtar wants “to help to consolidate Sharia rule in northern Mali, where armed Islamists are enforcing Islamic law very strictly after having driven the Malian army out in the spring,” the French daily added… Belmokhtar will finance his activities “including the purchase of weapons” by “specialising in the kidnapping of Westerners, whom he usually frees in return for large ransoms”.

So why would Mokhtar, a long-time leader of AQIM, break from the group that according to ‘Western analysts’ is becoming so strong? Much of the recent counterterrorism analysis I have read suggests that ransoms from kidnappings, foreign fighters moving to the Sahel, weapons from Libya’s collapse has all led to unity and strength in AQIM. But is that the case, the All Africa article suggests something different.

“One of the reasons for this dissent is the disagreement between these leaders over how to share the ransoms paid for the release of Western hostages,” said Abdalahi Ould Ahmed, editor-in-chief of the daily newspaper Chouhoud….”As the organisation has grown and incorporated fighters of different origins, conflicts of interests have become increasingly frequent,” he added….Journalist Hamid Fekhart argued that “Droukdel’s decision was motivated by the unruliness of his junior, who is thought to have been gunning for him over the past few months. Security sources say that the supreme leader, who tried in vain to bring Mokhtar Belmokhtar to heel, simply decided to relieve him of his duties as part of a bid to reorganise AQIM.”…Fekhart noted that his successor, thirty-six year old Abou El Hammam, was reportedly “behind the kidnapping of an Italian-Burkina Faso couple in the Sahel in December 2010″.

Well, it looks like more money and fighters has led to more conflict than unity in AQIM. Analysis suggesting more of any one terror group input (Weapons, money, fighters, etc) will lead directly to a stronger collective whole (AQIM) naively ignores the one thing that is most difficult to quantify and analyze: Human nature.

Concurrent to recent discussions of the rise of Shabaab (February-ish 2012), AQAP in Yemen (May-ish 2012) and then AQIM (Summer-ish 2012) has been the notion that al Qaeda’s ideology continues unabated, stronger than ever, and remains a binding tie that overides petty disputes within the terror group over leadership and resources. GARBAGE! Ideology and money go hand-in-hand for al Qaeda. Money without ideology turns AQ affiliates into little more than organized criminal groups. Ideology without money, over time, renders al Qaeda nothing more than a poorly resourced cult drowned out by better financed Muslim Brotherhood affiliated organizations. As Gregory Johnsen noted in his book on AQAP, what separated Bin Laden and al Qaeda from other militant groups was that:

“Bin Laden talked less than others, but he planned more. And he had something no one else had: money.”

In June, I argued that the al Qaeda of 9/11/2001 really does not exist today. One of the reasons I pushed this theory arises from the new state of acquisition and allocation of resources amongst al Qaeda affiliates. Across al Qaeda’s global footprint, decentralization has led to there being more incentive for affiliates to compete than cooperate. With Bin Laden’s death, donors spread their funds more diffusely and local affiliate illicit revenue schemes must increase. Ultimately, this change leads to al Qaeda affiliates with waning allegiance to al Qaeda Central. As I noted in July,

For counterterrorists, Belmokhtar’s defection will hopefully prove to be instructive. How do we replicate the conditions that led to Belmokhtar’s creation of a competing terror group? In some cases, infrequent but well calculated drone strikes on key AQ leaders, I believe, can be very effective. However, I think in the end it might be subtle, indirect actions that help exploit these factors. What if the French or Germans were to only pay kidnapping ransoms to one leader of AQIM as opposed to another? Could we use the unfortunate action of having to pay ransoms as a method/opportunity for creating dissension in the ranks of a loosely formed al Qaeda coalition? Maybe.

Six years ago when I worked at the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point, no one really wanted much to do with researching terrorism and counterterrorism in Africa. The signs were already emerging that al Qaeda was migrating to the continent and weak and failed African states seemed ripe for future safe havens. However, most everyone in the terrorism and counterterrorism research community were busy chasing the latest conflict, Iraq, and focusing on unappreciated backwater conflicts like the Sahel or the Horn of Africa seemed foolish to most. I fortunately didn’t have to fight off many other takers to do the research for al Qaeda’s (Mis) Adventures in the Horn of Africa. Well, much has changed.

This past Monday I attended the Homeland Security Policy Institute’s session with General Carter Ham, Commander of U.S. Africa Command. It turned out to be an excellent session and if one is interested in watching the discussion see this link here and watch the video. I expected to see and hear a lot of discussion and question and answer on Benghazi but the topic was only lightly touched…as if the election has finally passed and conversation can now focus beyond a single incident. The topic most discussed was Mali. Everyone wanted to know what AFRICOM was planning on doing and when they would do it. General Ham offered that the solution to the AQIM presence in Mali would require an African solution and pointed to how the U.S. has been supporting others countering al Shabaab as a model for what AFRICOM might put together in Mali.

The New York Times also did a good write up on the event noting that General Ham discussed connections between terrorist groups in Africa.

In addition to the risks inside Mali, General Ham also said that members of Boko Haram, an extremist group in northern Nigeria, had traveled to training camps in northern Mali and have most likely received financing and explosives from the Qaeda franchise. “We have seen clear indications of collaboration among the organizations,” he said.

I’ve heard this reported often in the news, but have on this blog always stressed the inverse question: “when do extremist groups in Africa not get along?” I was lucky enough to get to ask that question to General Ham at the end of the session and he responded. General Ham said that there has been conflict between foreign fighters coming into extremist groups and exerting themselves as the leadership, which is not always appreciated by the locals. Ahh, well maybe the “Somalia Model” will work after all, as it was there where local Somali clans had no real interest in being bossed around by foreigner fighters, particularly in the 1990’s as well as more recently at the height of al Shabaab.

I’ve been slow to discuss the fascinating turn of events in the Sahel in recent months. Mali, considered by some a great hope for democracy in West Africa, has fallen to pieces in a combined resistance effort from the Tuareg rebellion and AQIM affiliated groups heavily-armed by weapons proliferating from the collapse of the Qaddafi regime in Libya.

In general, I turn to @tweetsintheME, @themoornextdoor, Dr. Geoff Porter, @tommymiles and @Hannahaniya to keep me informed on the daily fluctuations and insecurity of the Sahel and recommend their blogs and Twitter feeds to all those wanting to stay up to speed. However, I’m reading a group of interesting articles and analysis to get a better handle on the situation. Here are some of my general thoughts and recommended readings linked in each section.

Thankfully young AQ upstart/affiliated groups haven’t read How to Win Friends and Influence People.Much like the Taliban in Afghanistan/Pakistan, Ansar al Sharia in Yemen and al Shabaab in Somalia, Ansar al Dine has decided to make a harsh environment, Northern Mali, even harsher by instituting a tyrannical form of Sharia governance. A refugee quoted in The Washington Post notes:
“First they ordered women to cover up. Then they ordered us not to enter the market,” said Yatara, a food seller, her voice rising. “ I could not make money to feed my child. This is against our traditions. This is against the Islam we know.” So what’s Ansar al Dine’s endgame, if it is not to win popular support? Here’s another quote: “There’s no work, no food. And they are restricting our freedoms,” Maiga said. “Why should we stay?” Strategically, for Ansar al Dine, I can’t understand what is to be gained by seizing and holding Timbuktu only to destroy some Islamic shrines, displace all the residents and stunt the economy – which was likely a source for Ansar al Dine to generate operational funds. I would hope residents of Northern Mali and competing groups will soon stand up to this group. We’ll see as the land holds little value for refugees to return to.

Geography matters: Ansar al Dine is “out in Timbuktu” after all. Some have begun speculating about whether Ansar al Dine is building a terrorist safe haven comparable to what is occurring in Yemen. At this point, I’m skeptical as the center of the Sahara is a harsh geography from which to operate. Westerners often speak unflatteringly about places difficult to reach as “being way out in Timbuktu”. This isn’t just a joke! Timbuktu is a harsh geography; a difficult place to project terrorism, generate revenue, resource operations, and attract recruits. Sure, terrorist attacks can be generated from here, but it’s not the easiest nor best safe haven for executing global terrorism.

While I’ve been overfocused on Somalia and al-Shabaab in recent weeks, many major changes have been occurring in Mali. The Tuareg Rebellion in Northern Mali has led to a coup and potentially generated an important vacuum for AQIM in the Sahel. I’m horribly uninformed on recent developments and working to get up to speed tonight. I’ll begin by reading these two articles from a couple favorites from my blogroll.

I recommend these two excellent posts for those, like me, that are trying to understand the implications of Mali’s upheaval – a country that plays a critical role in Western counterterrorism against AQIM.

Alex Thurston posted a really excellent analysis on the options for dealing with kidnapping. He describes the pros and cons of five different options and ultimately settles on a hybrid of all of them. Alex’s discussion is really good and I encourage all interested in the kidnapping debate to check it out. Ultimately, I am still of the opinion that Westerners should be advised not to travel to the region under any circumstances and that no ransom should ever be paid.

I respect Alex’s points on development and extending military capacity in Mali, Niger, and Mauritania. However, the West has tried economic development and government capacity improvement in the Sahel for fifty years without success. Military capacity strengthening can also turn into militia arming or warlord development. With the U.S. engaged and trying to solve problems in Afghanistan, Iraq, and now North Africa, I don’t see how the U.S. could execute a large-scale coordinated effort in the Sahel. If there is any progress to be made, I think the Europeans must lead as they know the terrain and its their people that are being kidnapped.

SelectedWisdom This chart shows key drivers of ISIS operations and where we might focus to erode them from within. Continue reading → The post Mapping Key Drivers of ISIS Success appeared first on %%www.selectedwisdom.com%%.

SelectedWisdom Selected Wisdom is hiring a motivated writer who can craft engaging narratives based on true stories. The writer must have proven track record of delivering tight manuscripts on time whose prose is concise and punchy. We need a storyteller, not … Continue reading → The post Seeking Motivated Writer for Project – Selected Wisdom […]